SC decision on version numbering: 4.0

[Phil Edwards]

On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 03:15:26PM -0700, Per Bothner wrote:
> 
> It's been suggested that 5.0 might be appropriate when we have
> a really stable C++ ABI, including libstdc++ header files.  You
> could make same condition for the in-progress Java "binary
> compatible" ABI.

Even I would agree with bumping the major number at those points.  I was
kinda hoping we'd wait for the former for 4.0, but enh.  Integers are cheap.

-- 
AI.cpp:33241: warning: You wrote 'neurons.merge(solution1, solution2)",
AI.cpp:33241: you probably MEANT "neurons->merge(solution1, solution2)",
AI.cpp:33241: but there is a MUCH better way to implement this whole
AI.cpp:33241: function; doing that instead.